This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
I don't mean to pry but there's always the what if...
So, what if you impress a whole a bunch of people and everyone and their dog
wants to give you a bigger network. Because you have chosen to stay away
from DHCP, there is a potential for a ton of problems.
My programming days in college taught me many things I'll never forget: Stay
away from static placement of variables, be ambiguous, plan and test for the
unknown, and be robust in design.
All I'm saying is plan for scalability no matter how large or small your
network may be. Spend the few hours to learn how your network could take
advantage of DHCP and how to implement it. This <em>could</em> save you tons
of time and money in the future.
...
Treading lightly,
Rob
At 01:30 PM 4/3/2002, Sean wrote:
>Howdy,
>>Wouldn't static IP addresses be the cause of such a situation? While
>servers (domain, sql, printer) should have fixed addresses, workstations
>may be better off with dynamic addresses.
I'm not a big fan of DHCP, especially for small networks. Any time you can
eliminate services that need to be understood with a derth of network
expertise available, the better off you are.
--
Anthony Baratta
President
Keyboard Jockeys
"Conformity is the refuge of the unimaginative."
--
For unsubscribe and other options, including
the Tip Harvester and archive of thelist go to:
http://lists.evolt.org Workers of the Web, evolt !